TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker and becoming a Supporting Member. For more info: Support TMC

We've grown accustomed to a certain David versus Goliath approach from Tesla. Admittedly, this hasn't always worked perfectly:

"In general, it seemed to me that, the way all other people started electric car companies, got in the business, was wrong. They wanted to make a car that would save the world. So, they needed to make a car that everyone could afford and they tried to come in at the bottom end of the market. They try to go up against very, very mature companies in a very, very mature industry. Every single component they buy costs them double what Honda or Hyundai or somebody pays for that same part. So they wind up with a car that's a piece of crap. No one wants to buy it. No other industry does that happen. No other industry do you start in the low end and work your way up." Martin Eberhard http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/10/15/teslas-co-founder-says-all-other-electric-car-companies-are-wro/

But Tesla should continue to punch above their weight. They are doing the impossible.

You know, I'm sure the guys at CalCars or Plug-In America would take exactly the opposite view: "Why settle for the same old BEV technology with all its problems and limitations, when we could make a great leap forward to PHEVs?"

'nothing against Cal-cars, but come on now... They "just" add more batteries and reprogram the controllers. What they do is simple compared to all Tesla has done. Cal-cars did add a feature that some people really wanted, but Tesla has gone and designed an all new car and is becoming a proper manufacturer and dealer. That is such a task that you haven't seen that happen in a while. (Although there is a sudden explosion if you count Fisker, Phoenix, Aptera, Miles, etc.)

'nothing against Cal-cars, but come on now... They "just" add more batteries and reprogram the controllers. What they do is simple compared to all Tesla has done. Cal-cars did add a feature that some people really wanted, but Tesla has gone and designed an all new car and is becoming a proper manufacturer and dealer. That is such a task that you haven't seen that happen in a while. (Although there is a sudden explosion if you count Fisker, Phoenix, Aptera, Miles, etc.)

Click to expand...

No, you completely misunderstood what I was trying to say. . . I wasn't referring to the plug-in Prius conversions at all. I meant, these various advocacy groups today are focusing on advocating PHEVs rather than BEVs. They'll give an occasional BEV a positive mention once in a while, but BEVs don't excite them.

The PHEV could, in theory, get people driving most of the time on grid electricity without the limitations of range and recharge time that have hamstrung past BEVs. It's that "have your cake and eat it too" aspect that excites them.

They don't see PHEVs as a timid half-measure that could lead to a bright future of BEVs. They see BEVs as something that might lead to a bright future of PHEVs.

They'll give an occasional BEV a positive mention once in a while, but BEVs don't excite them.

Click to expand...

Good heavens! Why ever not? The game isn't going to end with the arrival of PHEVs.

The BEV is THE engineering challenge of the 21st century. It may well be that in terms of available internal volume and required range, a large PHEV will be easier to sell to the American motorist, but once that happens, customers will do the running cost math and experience the ride with and without the generator working.

Those brief experiences of all-electric motoring will increase the demand for better electrics in PHEVs and convince some to accept the (different set of) compromises/greater price of a BEV.

It may well be that in terms of available internal volume and required range, a large PHEV will be easier to sell to the American motorist, but once that happens, customers will do the running cost math and experience the ride with and without the generator working.

Those brief experiences of all-electric motoring will increase the demand for better electrics in PHEVs and convince some to accept the (different set of) compromises/greater price of a BEV.

There is going to be no better advertising for BEVs than a few PHEVs.

Click to expand...

Oh yeah! I suspect you're right about that. But it's still speculation, and there are a lot of skeptics in the industry who don't and won't see it that way until it happens.

Even though attitudes are changing, there's still a stigma -- especially among those who haven't been following the latest developments -- that a BEV is something inferior and unwanted which needs to be shoved down the public's collective throat for their own good, like bad-tasting medicine. Tesla's whole strategy is about turning that attitude around, but it'll take a long time for the light to dawn on most people.

I'll do my part. . . When I get my Roadster I'll be happy to drive it around and show it off, and help educate the public. :biggrin:

I think most of the general public would sooner buy a PHEV than a BEV. They can benefit from the plug in advantages but still don't have to worry about "running out of charge" After maybe 10 years of switching people over to PHEVs, I can see more and more people being set up for and used to plugging in their cars at night, and not feeling the need to have the "gas" support.

Ultimately, I hope everyone drives a BEV at least for a daily vehicle, since even a small improvement in the local power plant will mean a huge change for every car on the road.

I don't see this happening for at least another 20 years, but that won't stop those of us that are really excited about it to get an early start. By then, we will be charging our BEVs for free from Solar or other forms of reuseable energy.

On thing I have heard about the "range extended BEV" (AKA series hybrid) is that some customers could potentially be "so green" (only doing short trips between plugs) that they never fire up the ICE. This actually poses a problem in that many ICEs need to run once and a while to stay healthy. For instance, gasoline degrades after a while so you don't want to just leave a full tank sitting there for years unused. Also oil and coolant systems are better off if you run them through periodically. Also belts are better off being rotated now and then so the rubber doesn't slowly mold to the pulley shapes.

There are a couple of ways around this:

#1: Have the software run the ICE now and then just to "clear out the cobwebs"
or
#2: Design an ICE system that can be left alone for long periods.
This might involve using compressed gas fuel rather than liquid. For instance, I think LPG in a tank could keep indefinitely compared to gasoline and bio-diesel which tend to break down over time. Also chains would be preferable over belts in this case, and you want to do something to keep the oil from thickening. (Perhaps run an electric oil pump now and then even though the ICE doesn't fire up?)

On thing I have heard about the "range extended BEV" (AKA series hybrid) is that some customers could potentially be "so green" (only doing short trips between plugs) that they never fire up the ICE. This actually poses a problem in that many ICEs need to run once and a while to stay healthy. For instance, gasoline degrades after a while so you don't want to just leave a full tank sitting there for years unused. Also oil and coolant systems are better off if you run them through periodically. Also belts are better off being rotated now and then so the rubber doesn't slowly mold to the pulley shapes.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I've been thinking about that too. I think that's one of the unstated reasons 40 miles is the magic number GM and others shoot for. It is (supposedly) the average distance the average American drives in a day. So you could expect that the ICE kicks in once a week or so when you've got a couple extra errands to run.

I'm guessing (pure speculation) that making the battery pack as small and inexpensive as possible is not the total motivation. Conventional automakers are so tied to the Otto cycle engine that they can't see a way around not using it. Putting a small gasoline engine that never gets used in a vehicle just doesn't make sense.

To make a vehicle that, as Elon suggests, gets as many miles off the grid as possible requires rethinking how you'll power the genset. I'm kind of fond of Dean Kamen's Stirling.

Home generators generally only have to fire off once a month to keep themselves in shape. Once a month isn't so bad.

Oh, and why does it have to always be in the car? What about a modular drop-in generator for only those long trips? If there were a couple of standard sizes, one could even imagine a rental business for them.

One word: weight. You do not want to lift 200 pound generator in and out of the trunk. Even with a garagemounted crane. One mini accident and you have a hole in the car body.

That's why I propose genset trailers. With some cargospace for a bag or two.

Click to expand...

I agree with both of you. I would love to own a pure BEV, and if further range is needed, I'll be happy with a drop-in ICE motor/generator or a genset trailer. Both have advantages and disadvantages. The main disadvantage of the trailer is the difficulty of backing up.

The great advantage of both is that you don't have them as part of the vehicle when they aren't needed. That feature is clearly superior to the plug-in hybrid concept.

As I guessed, based on all I've learned about efficiencies available from electric motors, the evnut.com link confirms,
"There is little question that this 350 pound trailer functioned as planned - sustaining freeways speeds for as long as the 9.5 gallon tank had gasoline. Amazingly, even with all the conversion losses added up, the gas mileage of this combo is comparable or BETTER than the pure gasoline version of the same vehicle."